[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Hardness, Calcium, Magnesium

John Fitch wrote:

> I believe these numbers are all in terms of CaCO3.  Am I correct in then
> multiplying the Calcium reading by 40/100 or 0.4 to obtain the Ca++
> concentration and the Magnesium reading by 24/100 or 0.24 to obtain the Mg++
> concentration?

You're correct.

> This would mean:
> Ca++ = 32 mg/l
> Mg++ = 14 mg/l

Looks fine to me.

> Secondly, I have found rather wide ranges of recommended levels for these
> two nutrients in the archives, but there seems to be some agreement on a
> ratio of Ca to Mg of 2:1 or 3:1, with a Ca range of 15-75 mg/l and an Mg
> range of 5-25 mg/l.  Are these ratios and ranges still the recommended
> values?  If not, what should I be aiming at?

I think they're fine.  I wouldn't worry too much abut the Ca:Mg ratio. 
You just don't want to go to extremes, like 10:1 or 1:10.  In nature Ca
normally exceeds Mg, but the actual ratio is quite variable.

> Thanks in advance for your corrections and advice.

Umm.  Buy low, sell high.

Roger Miller